Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[nobody]

1) Yes. 2) All of it.

The basic idea is obvious, but it only became a patent law matter when a use for it arose.

The details may not be obvious to the average surfer, but they are to a programmer.

So are you saying that you would allow a patent on ANYTHING no matter how obvious, just as long as a commercial use for it comes up and no previous patent has been filed?

Einstein and Edison (a distant relation) would shake their heads at the state of patent law today.

I guess we could argue all day about whether or not the details of the one-click patent are obvious in a legal sense, so I'll just pass along this article which more or less echos my feelings...
http://www.around.com/patent.html

[JimIvey]

1) Yes. 2) All of it.

I see.  The title is a mockery: " Method and system for placing a purchase order via a communications network"  The list of inventors is a mockery.  The application serial number is a mockery.  The name of the examiner is a mockery.

Yes, this is very helpful information.

The basic idea is obvious, but it only became a patent law matter when a use for it arose.

The details may not be obvious to the average surfer, but they are to a programmer.

So are you saying that you would allow a patent on ANYTHING no matter how obvious, just as long as a commercial use for it comes up and no previous patent has been filed?

First of all, I am a programmer.  It wasn't necessarily obvious to me as of September 12, 1997.  I think the implementation of one-click is fraught with opportunities for fraud and is therefore somewhat counter-intuitive.  

And, of course the patent law doesn't allow just anything no matter how obvious.  That assertion itself is absurd.

Einstein and Edison (a distant relation) would shake their heads at the state of patent law today.

So, now you speak for historical figures?  And, the patent law could have been designed so that only truly huge figures like Einstein and Edison could be inventors.  The law isn't designed that way.  Talk to your Congressperson if you don't like it.

I guess we could argue all day about whether or not the details of the one-click patent are obvious in a legal sense, so I'll just pass along this article which more or less echos my feelings...
http://www.around.com/patent.html

In this forum, the legal sense of obviousness is precisely the sense of obviousness that matters.  If you want to air your emotional reaction to intellectual property irrespective of the law, you can find a forum for that at slashdot.org.

Finally, the one-click patent is absurdly easy to avoid.  Simply add an "are you sure?" dialog (a second click) to the purchase process and you don't infringe.  So, this patent is hardly the show stopper for e-commerce that everyone seems to think it is.

Regards.